  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
 ·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
| When will they learn The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace.
Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. | |
|
 |
1 edit | Re: When will they learn If we paying for our connection they cant do that. | |
|
| | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: When will they learn you pay for your internet connection...plus a monthly fee for world of warcraft. how is that different? | |
|
| | | | said by brooklynman4:If we paying for our connection they cant do that. It's not your connection, its the ISP's. The ISP has the right to do whatever they want with the connection to your premise. Don't like it? Buy a T1. Can't afford it? Don't complain  .
And I do agree with you, the RIAA should be figuring out how to make money off pirates, not make them outcasts. | |
|
| | | | | Re: When will they learn I have a definitive study that one can believe. It does not cost money or involve research. It' is a mere few words and to the point. What might you ask is this ingenious study of epic proportatons:
99 PERCENT OF FACTS ARE MADE UP.
Those words speak no truer than in this article we read here. | |
|
| | | FAQFixerPremium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
kudos:1 | said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:said by brooklynman4:If we paying for our connection they cant do that. ...the RIAA should be figuring out how to make money off pirates, not make them outcasts. The idea that you can somehow make money from someone who steals is laughable. They steal because they don't want to pay anything; making it less expensive isn't going to change their behavior. When someone shoplifts merchandise from a store they don't suddenly have a change of heart and decide to pay for it when that item goes on sale! | |
|
| | | | | said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:said by brooklynman4:If we paying for our connection they cant do that. It's not your connection, its the ISP's. The ISP has the right to do whatever they want with the connection to your premise. Don't like it? Buy a T1. Can't afford it? Don't complain . How would purchasing a T1 vs dsl (which is a T1 in some circumstances) make difference?
said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:And I do agree with you, the RIAA should be figuring out how to make money off pirates, not make them outcasts. Aren't pirates people at sea? Or maybe people that are selling "intellectual goods" outside of an arranged agreement?
Sounds like you are talking about people listening to music on the radio and/or the internet & tv | |
|
| | | | | | Re: When will they learn said by xsiddalx:said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:said by brooklynman4:If we paying for our connection they cant do that. It's not your connection, its the ISP's. The ISP has the right to do whatever they want with the connection to your premise. Don't like it? Buy a T1. Can't afford it? Don't complain . How would purchasing a T1 vs dsl (which is a T1 in some circumstances) make difference? A T1 is unmetered, unfiltered, a direct pipe to the internet. Which means you can bang away streaming movies off of netflix all day and your ISP wont say jack. Of course, I assume you knew all that already . 5GB, 500GB doesn't matter in a T1, that connection is yours to do whatever (legal bounds of course) you want. | |
|
| | | | said by brooklynman4:If we paying for our connection they cant do that. How so? Haven't you read you contract? You are likely getting what you paid for. | |
|
|  Frankis chillingPremium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
1 edit | said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. actually if they made it more like netflix streaming except with all movies and more in HD instead of limited releases then it would probably cut back on piracy. They could even show movies that are currently in theatres like a week or two after release.
of course none of this would ever work because the cable companies would freak out and impose insane caps in order to prevent loss of their market share.
--
At first I thought everyone on the highway was drunk but then I realized I was driving in Florida  | |
|
|  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. What do movies have to do with the RIAA?
But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
| Re: When will they learn I am just saying, everyone is pirating music, or at least has downloaded a few MP3s that they didnt buy.
the next step is movies, which are becoming more and more easily accessible. this would be the mpaa, so i was not very clear with my original comment. | |
|
| |  dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | said by Romney2012:But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. What about all the free advertisement and added sales from paying customers that otherwise would have never heard of various artists other than from the *copied* files from the internet?
It happens, and even the RIAA knows it.
As for the morals comment, what morals do the RIAA have?
Suing without proof?
Strongarm websites and automated nastygrams:
»Small ISPs, Facing Recession, Don't Want To Be RIAA Cops
That's ok though? 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: When will they learn said by dadkins:said by Romney2012:But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. What about all the free advertisement and added sales from paying customers that otherwise would have never heard of various artists other than from the *copied* files from the internet? It happens, and even the RIAA knows it. As for the morals comment, what morals do the RIAA have? Suing without proof? Strongarm websites and automated nastygrams: » Small ISPs, Facing Recession, Don't Want To Be RIAA CopsThat's ok though? Two wrongs don't make a right. If the RIAA needs to be reined in, it is done in the courts - not thru vigilante action.
And without defending the RIAA & MPAA zealousness in attacking piracy, it has to be said that they didn't start this war. The music and movie thieves did.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | | dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18
1 edit | Re: When will they learn Get it right, no "thievery" is happening.
Nothing is being displaced.
While copying is deemed wrong, it isn't theft.
It's copying.
So, because little Joey downloads *1* song, he immediately owes thousands of dollars(hundreds of thousands?) for a single lost sale - one that was never going to happen in the first place?
No, that's BS and you know it!
All the while, music sales are climbing.
Remember the CubScouts? Remember someone wanting to sue over singing campfire songs?
Yeah... WTF is with that?
No matter how many sprinkles you pour on a turd, it's still shit!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
| | | | |  Doctor FourMy other vehicle is a TARDISPremium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | Re: When will they learn said by dadkins:Get it right, no "thievery" is happening. Nothing is being displaced. While copying is deemed wrong, it isn't theft. It's copying. People like him will never get it. Face it, trying to convince those of his ilk that filesharing != stealing is like talking to a brick wall.
said by dadkins:So, because little Joey downloads *1* song, he immediately owes thousands of dollars(hundreds of thousands?) for a single lost sale - one that was never going to happen in the first place? No, that's BS and you know it! All the while, music sales are climbing. The entire idea of filesharing = stealing is based on the false doctrine of a download equaling a lost sale. Nothing could be further from the truth.
And it has now been rejected in a Virginia Federal Court:
»recordingindustryvspeople.blogsp···65726677
The case involved a restitution motion which was rejected by Dictrict Judge James P. Jones.
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
| |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
| said by Romney2012:Two wrongs don't make a right. If the RIAA needs to be reined in, it is done in the courts - not thru vigilante action. Haha that's if you naively assume the courts are working towards justice, which they're not. They're working towards keeping the law; unfortunately, many of the laws are created by government through intense lobbying and kickbacks. | |
|
| | | | DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | "Two wrongs don't make a right."
Maybe not, but they DO strike a moral balance. Actually, our legal system is kinda based on the premise that two wrongs DO make a right. If I hurt you, you call the state and they send enforcers to hurt me. Depending on the nature of my offense (violent crime specifically), you'll probably never see any payback for my actions (financially or morally) so your hurt never gets repaired. But two folks (you and me) have suffered and the state says "justice done and balance struck". That sounds to me a lot like two wrongs making a right. | |
|
| | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | said by Romney2012:People without any morals at all. Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no morals at all!
The problem is not morals. If it was a choice between paying a small monthly fee for a decent amount of entertaintment or piracy - people would pay.
If however the choice is paying $20 for one CD or movie, then guess what - people don't have that kind of money to throw away at the entertaintment industry. Price it right and people will buy.
The problem here is not morals - it is supply and demand. There's no demand for entertaintment at the prices they charge. People choose to download a movie not because they like downloading movies - it takes time and effort - they download a movie because the alternative just costs too much.
But, alas, the AA's and the companies controlling them are trying to fight a battle to keep their monopoly pricing in place. They will lose. It's impossible to stop piracy. What they should be doing is selling their stuff online, at a price cheap enough that piracy would not be attractive anymore. Anything else will fail. You can't change supply and demand - you can only yield to it. | |
|
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: When will they learn said by nitzan:said by Romney2012:People without any morals at all. Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no morals at all! The problem is not morals. If it was a choice between paying a small monthly fee for a decent amount of entertaintment or piracy - people would pay. If however the choice is paying $20 for one CD or movie, then guess what - people don't have that kind of money to throw away at the entertaintment industry. Price it right and people will buy.The problem here is not morals - it is supply and demand. There's no demand for entertaintment at the prices they charge. People choose to download a movie not because they like downloading movies - it takes time and effort - they download a movie because the alternative just costs too much. But, alas, the AA's and the companies controlling them are trying to fight a battle to keep their monopoly pricing in place. They will lose. It's impossible to stop piracy. What they should be doing is selling their stuff online, at a price cheap enough that piracy would not be attractive anymore. Anything else will fail. You can't change supply and demand - you can only yield to it. So your defense is that it costs too much and that makes it OK to steal it. That is the defense all thieves throughout history have used. I can't afford it; I want it; therefore I'll just take it.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: When will they learn said by Romney2012:So your defense is that it costs too much and that makes it OK to steal it. That is the defense all thieves throughout history have used. I can't afford it; I want it; therefore I'll just take it. Who's talking about a defense? I'm talking about economy. The entertainment industry wants profits? adapt to the market.
Can't adapt? go bankrupt.
It's that simple.
Thinking about it in terms of "thieves" will achieve a big nothing. If they want more customerspeople pissed off at them then keep telling everyone they're "theives". You simply can't fight piracy when your little sister is "a pirate". It's mainstream already, deal with it. Either learn to live with and take advantage of it - or perish.
I'm just waiting for those idiots to fly on their private jets to Washington to ask for a government bailout "because piracy stole our profits". | |
|
| | | | | | said by Romney2012:So your defense is that it costs too much and that makes it OK to steal it. That is the defense all thieves throughout history have used. I can't afford it; I want it; therefore I'll just take it. And your defense of the RIAA would be that since they can afford to bankrupt people before they get to court that they should be allowed to run over the existing laws.
If you haven't noticed lately, the RIAA has not been passing the litigation test too often and are quietly losing or dropping cases they have no chance of winning without compensating anyone because of their bad behavior. Have they even paid the legal fees they were told to pay because of their one lawsuit? How about losing to Jammie Thomas since they couldn't prove anything?
Try again corporate apologist. | |
|
| | | | wentlancYou Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | It's called setting prices that the market will not bear. You have to adjust, or the market will find another way. It's just business. Why do you seem to make it so personal?
cw | |
|
| | | | shepd
join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Distributel
| said by Romney2012:So your defense is that it costs too much and that makes it OK to steal it. That is the defense all thieves throughout history have used. I can't afford it; I want it; therefore I'll just take it. *sigh* You aren't getting it when it comes to stealing. Here's some examples of stealing/theft:
The obvious: You leave your laptop on your desk at work. The janitor walks by and think "Ooooh, shiny" and stick it in my trunk. You have stolen by depriving the owner of his hardware.
The similar: You walk into HMV and 5-finger-discount a CD. You have stolen because HMV paid money for that CD and can no longer sell it or use it.
The well-known: You break into the cable box and get free cable. You have stolen by depriving the cable-co of the security of their possessions and depriving them of the (miniscule) amount of electricity to drive the signal to your TV.
The not-so-obvious: You phreak the phone network for free long distance. You have done the same as with the cable network, with the additional theft of a long distance circuit that should be assigned to someone else.
The dangerous: You run a grow-op. You tap directly into the utilities power grid and use electricity without permission. You have stolen the electricity that the utility put directly into the power grid for the purpose of sale to other customers--other customers can no longer use the electricity you took (obvious).
What isn't stealing:
Wrapping an inductor around the power lines above your house: This actually happened somewhere in my province. A farmer powered his shed by wrapping a coil around the power lines above his house. Since he never directly touched them, the utility could not accuse him of theft (he simply used the "waste EMF field" generated by the utilities power transmission). The utility moved the power lines off his property, so they could not only undo his scheme, but also charge him with trespass. They also had a special law passed to deal with this type of using electricity without permission because obviously this sort of thing is unwanted, but until that point, was totally legal.
Fraud: You copy Snakes on a Plane. You fake all the art on the DVD and fake the case and sell it as an original at original prices. You haven't stolen from the buyer, however, you have committed fraud since you told the buyer it was real when it wasn't. Some people conflate this with theft, and to a certain degree they are right: The buyer intended to give money to the MPAA et al, but was fraudulently denied the right to do so. You could legitimately consider that money stolen from the MPAA.
Casual copying: You download Snakes on a Plane from the internet, knowing full well it is a fake. This is definitely copyright infringement, but it is NOT stealing. Why? Well, tell me who lost what. The person giving it to you lost nothing but their time, which they willingly gave you. The MPAA/studio lost nothing since they weren't involved in the transaction at all. You can't even try to suggest that the MPAA/studio lost money, since no money was exchanged and the MPAA /studio does not sell fakes, and therefore isn't involved.
Suggesting the MPAA/studio are owed something for "theft" when it is just casual copying is laughed at by judges/lawyers the same way Marilyn Milian laughs at at Plaintiffs asking for "pain and suffering" money. There's no proof and therefore it didn't happen.
People/things that agree with me on this: ALL dictionaries (every single one I've read, and that's at least a dozen), ALL encyclopedias, ALL competent lawyers, ALL judges, ALL English teachers, MOST all people that care about the issue of copyright infringement.
Things that disagree with me on this: You, the MPAA/RIAA, the general public that doesn't understand what copyright infringement is. Suggesting this means you're right is like suggesting an entire computer is a hard drive/CPU/"tower" or that an RJ-11 is a phone plug (It isn't, RJ means registered JACK) because 90% of the people on the street will say it is. Might doesn't make right, even with the English language. | |
|
| | | | |
thumbs down from:
Romney2012 
| Re: When will they learn ZOMFG. Could not of said it better myself. Its Ok to record an episode of friends on tivo. why is this different. | |
|
| | | ditka_bPremium
join:2001-10-05
Barrington, IL | Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no mo "Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no morals at all!"
You are insane lol | |
|
| | | |  CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | Re: Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have n said by ditka_b:"Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no morals at all!" You are insane lol I think he forgot his sarcasm tag? | |
|
| | | FAQFixerPremium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
kudos:1 | Re: When will they learn said by nitzan:said by Romney2012:People without any morals at all. Yeah, because pirates are worse than murderers.. they have no morals at all! The problem is not morals. If it was a choice between paying a small monthly fee for a decent amount of entertaintment or piracy - people would pay. If however the choice is paying $20 for one CD or movie, then guess what - people don't have that kind of money to throw away at the entertaintment industry. Price it right and people will buy.The problem here is not morals - it is supply and demand. There's no demand for entertaintment at the prices they charge. People choose to download a movie not because they like downloading movies - it takes time and effort - they download a movie because the alternative just costs too much. I was brought up to think that if you didn't have enough money to get something, one of two things happened.
1. You worked harder to get more money to buy it.
2. You didn't get it.
The problem is not morals...the problem is your morals. | |
|
| | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: When will they learn said by FAQFixer:I was brought up to think that if you didn't have enough money to get something, one of two things happened. 1. You worked harder to get more money to buy it. 2. You didn't get it. Yes- and people who "pirate" don't get it. They get a copy, maybe, but there's no stealing involved as there is no "it" to steal. Intellectual property does not exist - it is a set of laws - not a thing.
What people like you don't understand is that "intellectual property" is not tangible. You do not have a God given right to own your ideas. The legal concept of intellectual property is in essence a way for society to encourage development for the good of the society. No- not the good of the record makers. No- not the good of the artists. For the good of society.
The problem with the entertaintment industry in America is that they seem to think they have an absolute right to their intellectual property. What they forgot is the society part and the fact that society can change intellectual property laws. When those idiots piss off enough people then guess what- the laws will change.
The problem is not morals...the problem is your morals. And here I thought the problem was internet trolls in green underwear who like to point the finger at people while yelling "you're the problem" in underscored sentences.
..guess I was wrong. | |
|
| | | | | FAQFixerPremium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
kudos:1 | Re: When will they learn Wow, how can you possibly retort that type of thinking? You obviously fit a certain profile and think it's fine because theres "nothing" to steal and it's not stealling. | |
|
| | | | | | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | Re: When will they learn said by FAQFixer:Wow, how can you possibly retort that type of thinking? You obviously fit a certain profile and think it's fine because theres "nothing" to steal and it's not stealling. It's not stealing.
Stealing=taking something which results in the previous owner no longer owning it.
Don't tell me you've never watched a VCR tape someone gave you. I honestly do not know a single person who hasn't. How is that any different than online "piracy"? If you define online "piracy" as stealing then we're all "thieves" - including you.
The only people who think piracy is "stealing" is those who stand to fatten their wallet from stopping it. These aren't morals - it's greed. | |
|
| |  BIGMIKEPremium
join:2002-06-07
Westminster, CA | said by Romney2012:said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. What do movies have to do with the RIAA? But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. Values and Morals in American Society: The 1950s Vs today »www.associatedcontent.com/articl···ety.html | |
|
| | |  DrugSkill
join:2005-11-14
Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, QC | Re: When will they learn said by BIGMIKE:said by Romney2012:said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. What do movies have to do with the RIAA? But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. Values and Morals in American Society: The 1950s Vs today » www.associatedcontent.com/articl···ety.html Thanks alot, this article was so refreshing. I'm putting it in my bookmarks. Nice article site overall too. | |
|
| |  TomClancyFreedom isn't free
join:2003-04-23
...
1 edit | said by Romney2012:said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. What do movies have to do with the RIAA? But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. What does xxIA's have to do anything in this whole topic?
What is that? Some kind of slang for porn? | |
|
| | | | said by Romney2012:said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. What do movies have to do with the RIAA? But aside from that, what ways would you suggest the xxIA's try that would get people to pay money for what they are now getting for free. You are talking about a lot of people who brag about paying nothing. People without any morals at all. I get tons off the local radio..."free".
I don't brag it just is what it is.
How does P2P differ from radio and internet distribution from an individual persons perspective? | |
|
| | | |
| | | The riaa needs to get a life.
The music industry makes more of their money from concerts now a days and use the music launch as a promo tool anymore.
I actually buy CD's or single tracks that I like!
I'm not going to pay for a CD full of crap.
People will just use TOR or other utils to mask their
downloading if they keep pushing. Major players sending hate letters to their subscribers, perfect time to find another provider. Cat and Mouse...
If they would offer the content at a good price, people would actually buy it.
Its just like ASCAP and playing a radio in a business.
GOD forbid the artist is not paid for that radio being played. Modern day gangsters is all they are. | |
|
| | |
| | | CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | Re: When will they learn said by Mac Bridger:The RIAA doesn't make anything from concerts. Concerts are where the artists makes their money. RIAA only makes money from recording sales, and they take most of the profit from that. I believe the record companies make the money from the sales, the RIAA makes the money from the record companies protecting the IP of the record companies. | |
|
| | | DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
1 edit | "The RIAA doesn't make anything from concerts."
Unless the artist was stupid or desperate enough to sign one of the new 360 deals that cuts the label in for a portion of ALL the artist's revenue sales. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Downloading is not stealing, just an FYI. atleast not in the eyes of the legal system, it is infact Copyright Infringement. doesnt make it anymore legal but it still is not the same as shoplifting(where money is infact lost) or holding up a 7-11.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. they are trying to make money and freeloaders want everything for free. that's the problem. networks now give out their shows for free. the only catch is a few small commercial and freeloader bitch about that. They put ads on their websites, oh wait, freeloaders use adblock. free loader expect to be provided with unlimited entertainment for free with no commercials or advertising. And exactly how are teh entertainment companies not only supposed to make a profit but even just pay the people it requires to produce this entertainment.
Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. A) for freeloaders that's too much.
B)you have ZERO clue as to how the entertainment system work. Where is the profit margin in that idea exactly? | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | you know, i feel sorry for the small struggling bands. yet they are the ones that seem to embrace all forms of downloading because unless they give their balls to a major record company they will never get radio time.
ill weep for the big stars when the likes of Metallica are going show to show in a beat up chevy van with a twice rebuilt engine instead of chartered jets and new luxury busses.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | |
| | | I have a definitive study that one can believe. It does not cost money or involve research. It' is a mere few words and to the point. What might you ask is this ingenious study of epic proportatons:
99 PERCENT OF FACTS ARE MADE UP.
Those words speak no truer than in this article we read here. | |
|
|
thumbs down from:
Romney2012
| Agreed... I started out downloading video content back when edonkey2000 (sharereactor) was the hot thing, then moved onto bittorrent (torrentz, mininova and TPB) ...now I moved onto Hulu, Joost and other legal streaming sites!
That's my consumer progression for enjoying the latest video in the digital age. Hollywood has turned the tide and offered marketplace solutions in a fairly quick time-frame.
The RIAA on the other hand still truly have not... though they finally should be able to offer free music when every1 has mobile Internet devices. | |
|
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: When will they learn said by chaser7016 :
The RIAA on the other hand still truly have not... though they finally should be able to offer free music when every1 has mobile Internet devices.
Never heard of last.fm, rhapsody, pandora, etc. ??
All offering legal free music
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | said by baineschile:The RIAA made a HUGE mistake when they cut off napster. They need to learn that this is becoming a truly digital entertainment marketplace. Why not figure a way to make money off of it, instead of cutting people off. Can you imagine paying $10/month for 5 downloaded movies a month? I think that would work spectacularly. Yep,
Pretty simple, isn't it?
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
| | Another fact twisting "study" from the RIAA This "study" doesn't show that 64% of people downloading pirated material would stop if they received a letter from their ISP threatening to cut off their service.
This "study" shows that when receiving a cold call from an unknown source, asking if they would continue "breaking the law" even after their ISP threatened to cut off their internet service for doing so, only 36% were honest enough to say they would keep doing it.
--
Intel Q6600 @3400Mhz/GA-EP35-DS3P/2x 2048Mb G.Skill/Seagate 750.10/EVGA 8800GT's SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
| | law i dont think it will become law you cant force isp to police
are web access. | |
|
| DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | Re: law The government certainly could, but it's unlikely they will because of A.) the many burdens this would place (unfairly) on the ISPs and B.) the incoming administration seems to be much more pro-consumer and I doubt will risk stirring up an already skittish American population with more threats and restrictions (meaning there's a risk you could lose your internet service not from pirating, but from a screw up based on an ineffective and severely flawed form of monitoring and detection).
What will REALLY decide the issue is who has the better lawyers, the **AAs or the telecommunications industry. And based on the spectacular results of the **AA's to try and force the legal system to act as their private collection agency, I'm betting on the ISPs. | |
|
| | | | Re: law Obama's choice for Attorney General is the same guy that's been running the RIAA's legal campaign against filesharers. | |
|
| bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY | Another reason for ISp's to add more charges to the monthly bill. Police Tax in addition to the other 2 or 3 added taxes. | |
|
| | | | Re: law They should just face it P2P is here to stay. No matter what they try to stop it. There will be people finding a way around it. Besides there is legit reasons for P2P of course. | |
|
 not quite rightI'm not cool enough to be a Mac person
join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
kudos:1 | Really? there's several ISPs, like AT&T, who have also supported this idea
I would really like to see were ISP's are going to support this Bullshit! Lets see ... We're responsible for Policing, Harassing, and cutting off our subscribers in these hard economic times ..... RIIIGGGHHHTTT!
--
"Not many people know this, but I happen to be quite famous." | |
|
| | Different ISP They probably didn't ask if when they got the letter/boot, would they continue on a different ISP. I think that would have been more interesting numbers. | |
|
|
|  DeftStros in '08Premium
join:2003-09-06
Grand Forks, ND | Re: Interesting Proposal I was warned by cox back in vegas and that was b/c of piratebay.. went back to my private trackers and bam no more warnings..
RIAA dont scurr me! | |
|
| | Encryption It seems to me, that if the RIAA keeps going like this, we'll soon find a majority of internet traffic to be encrypted. I get the feeling thats the way the RIAA is pushing it anyways. | |
|
approval from:
dadkins
| This isn't new Thirty-five years ago, I rarely bought albums. I borrowed my friends', or checked them out of the library, and taped them. For every record I bought, I taped a hundred. In the 1970s, the local free-form radio station broadcast a brand-new record in its entirety each night at midnight, with announcements to "get your levels right".
When CDs became the standard, I did the same with them. I also started buying CDs from pawn shops for as little as $2 each. When CD recorders became affordable, I maintained the same habits with better results.
I also copied VHS tapes in the same way, taped movies from friends HBO, and in the early days of DVDs I taped borrowed/rented DVDs. For fourteen years, I had a Panasonic VCR that blithely ignored Macrovision, making things easier. Since 2002, I make direct DVD copies.
So, of course, these days I grab MP3s and movies from various online sources for free. It doesn't seem novel, oe new, or unusual. Only the technology is different. I am doing nothing wrong, no matter what you say.
Bottom line: Getting entertainment at little or no cost is a way of life for this AARP member, and I am far from alone. The RIAA/MPAA is making a lot of noise about old habits that are very ingrained in the audience, handed down from generation to generation. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
|
| |  DiD you ALL MiSs ThE SMEARjob that this piece amounts to?
Here's the rub: I USE P2P ALL THE TIME AND PIRATE NOTHING. Linux distros, actively maintained takedown-on-request sites such as »conspiracycentral.net, etc etc etc! The historic relelvance here is that P2P is just that.. empowering techno which lets people create their own interconnectedness-- as opposed in a big way to an online world nothing like we've come to enjoy it which the Corporate Fascisti who control congresscritters are so eagerly pushing on us all.
which reminds me, folks ought to ask »theAlexJonesShow.com to run a tracker.. so much interesting stuff he feeds out. (But he's crazy nuts on global warming.. whatever happened to ChomskyTorrents.info ??)
Be sure to tell »change.gov about your steadfast support of utterly genuine Net Neutrality! | |
|
 thenderScreen tycoonPremium
join:2009-01-01
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1 | We've received the music industry we deserved. Everyone wondes how not paying for music wil effect stuff.
I hear all the time - and agree, tht modern pop & rock music is some of the worst of any era.
Prior to the consumer buuying an album, music was funded by rich people. A big reason a lot of music was the same 100-200 yrs ago was because if you didn't fit the kind of music the bourgesoise of the time preferred, you didn't receive any money or attention.
It's one thing to say "not paying for music or supporting the artist ever" is ok. But, remember, you are creating the music industry you get.
Also, the argument "I don't pay for music because the RIAA is evil" is moot - regardless of ANY scheming junk, in the "old model", good talent was often coached, supported, and paid well. As "evil" as they are, they at least look out for the artist in some way, which is more than you can say about the "free music all the way" downloader. | |
|
| | | Re: We've received the music industry we deserved. Someone needs to pull a Steam. Have us able to buy a HD movie and be able to download it whenever we want. Cut the cost out of manufacturing DVD's and packaging. The price can be minimal. HD is the key however. Not some low encoded 700MB AVI file. | |
|
| | thenderScreen tycoonPremium
join:2009-01-01
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1 | Re: We've received the music industry we deserved. Hey I totally hear you on the HD.
It is ridiculous that the only way to get season 5 or 6 of 24 in HD is piracy.
I think the online distribution of video is totally fucked at the moment.
However, with DVDs - you're not paying for packaging, or manufacturing. The price could be minimal if the $20 for a movie were only for the disc.. you're paying the people who filmed it. the actors. the directors. The symphony orchestra that did the original score, the person who composed it. The recording studio for the soundtrack. the cameramen, their crew.
Whether or not you believe the stuff should be free, or cost money - or whether it is stealing, I don't care. What I do care about is the false idea that something is overpriced because it costs more to buy than it does to manufacture. The end product is worthless, but what leads up to the end product costs millions. | |
|
 xdeadhead220, 221, Whatever It Takes.Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA | margin of error on that poll is prolly +/- 64 percent. | |
|
1 edit | Their plan is not going to work against FREEDOM I find it very disturbing that dslreports would even help them publicize this crap story, obviously their motive behind the study is to convince everybody that its something that they should be doing. Thanks for helping them dslreports your doing a great job screwing us all over. I know some people who have got warnings and that doesn't really stop them. One guy is going as for as configuring his Linux kernel to garbage out sensitive information that they collect for legal purposes.
This isn't going to work, you can't stop the flow of free information unless you make encryption illegal and break key aspects of the Constitution, believe it or not. It's our RIGHT to pirate information. | |
|
| |  Not Gonna work but make it worst....
Just use the legit one for daily surfin etc... The RIAA / MPAA needs to get their heads out of their asses and leave it all alone... They're doing nothing but makin it worst on themselves as well the ISPs who comply w/ their requests...
Soon eventually they will see this tread happening with all of the BW caps being implemented... It's all going to end up not being fair since these pirates will then be cyclin' thur HFC MACs after each one's BW Cap has reached the max limit and the legit owner of the cloned HFC MAC will be payin the tab and steamin mad since they got charged for overusuage then the ISP will look closely and see it was cloned and have no choice but to cut these charges off and accept the loss.
Even tho the ISPs have the power to stop cloning and all sorts of illegal acts on their network they simply will not.. They would rather cry foul and have the FBI go out after these folks which BTW is like lookin for a needle in a haystack and wasting our tax dollars just cuz they don't want to enable several security features and END IT ALL... Why? Because they want to spend as little $ on their equipment/network so the shareholders & CEOS have more $$$ to pad up their wallets with...
It's all BS seriously... No one is gonna do their job properly and the way it should be done... Which would be going after these massive large scale warez rings and not just the END USER / Small time user... But yeah they've pretty much drove these rings way underground while they've been gripin' over small time users etc... So it's prob virtually impossible to take them down by now cuz they've done nothing but given these rings ample timing to move and make their hubs / dumps more secure.
As well pushing the ISPs to enable their security & boost their network up to today's security standards. But I don't see the Software folks griping' bout this... They let it fly cuz they know it's cheaper in the long run... They just try and increase security on their products / make it harder to crack etc... Which is much more productive than whining out like a 5 year old gal that just had candy stolen from her like the RIAA / MPAA | |
|
|
| | How the DMCA really applies to ISPs
Dear ISP:
Thank you for forwarding me the notice you received from (COMPLAINER) regarding "WHATEVER YOU LIBERATED". I would like to assure you that, contrary to the assertions in the notice, 1) I am not hosting or making available the claimed infringing materials, and 2) you are already protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's ("DMCA") safe harbor from any liability arising from this complaint. The notice is incorrect, probably based upon misunderstandings about law and about some of the software I run.
First, in terms of legal liability, this notice does not create any risk for you as a service provider. As you know, the DMCA creates four "safe harbors" for service providers to protect them from copyright liability for the acts of their users, when the ISPs fulfill certain requirements. (17 U.S.C. § 512) The DMCA's requirements vary depending on the ISP's role. You may be most familiar with the "notice and takedown" provisions of DMCA 512(c), but those apply only to content hosted on your servers, or to linking and
caching activity. The "takedown notice" provisions do not apply when an ISP merely acts as a conduit. Instead, the "conduit" safe harbor of DMCA 512(a) has different and less burdensome requirements, as the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals held in RIAA v. Verizon (see
»www.eff.org/legal/cases/RIAA_v_V···1219.pdf) and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed in RIAA v. Charter (see
»www.eff.org/IP/P2P/Charter/033802P.pdf).
Here, any content that came from or through my computers merely passed through your network, so DMCA 512(a) applies. Under DMCA 512(a), you are immune from money damages for copyright infringement claims if you maintain "a policy that provides for termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network who are repeat infringers." If you have and implement such a policy, you are free from fear of copyright damages, period.
As for what makes a reasonable policy, as the law says, it's one that only terminates subscribers who are repeat infringers. A notice claiming infringement is not the same as a determination of infringement. The notification you received is not proof of any copyright infringement, and it
certainly is not proof of the "repeat infringement" that is required under the law before you need to terminate my account. I have not infringed any copyrights and do not intend to do so. Therefore, you continue to be protected under the DMCA 512(a) safe harbor, without taking any further action.
You might be curious, though, about what did trigger the notice. The software that likely triggered the faulty notice is a program I run called Tor. Tor is network software that helps users to enhance their privacy, security, and safety online. It does not host or make available any content. Rather, it is part of a network of nodes on the Internet that simply pass packets among themselves before sending them to their destinations, just as any Internet host does. The difference is that Tor tunnels the connections such that no hop can learn both the source and destination of the packets, giving users protection from nefarious snooping on network traffic. Tor
protects users against hazards such as harassment, spam, and identity theft. In fact, initial development of Tor, including deployment of a public-use Tor network, was a project of the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, with
funding from ONR and DARPA. (For more on Tor, see
»»www.torproject.org/.) As an organization committed to protecting the privacy of its customers, I hope you'll agree that this is a valuable technology.
Thank you for working with me on this matter. As a loyal subscriber, I appreciate your notifying me of this issue and hope that the complete protections of DMCA 512 put any concerns you may have at rest. If not, please contact me with any further questions.
Very truly yours,
Your customer, YOUR NAME HERE | |
|
| | Its not stealing. If a friend of your bought a brand new car and he says, hey do you want me to make you a copy, would you say no? | |
|
|
|
·
·